Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
I've heard the term 'New Labour' used more and more as a cultural reference to the era of Tony Blair's Government, rather than its literal meaning coined around 1995 to describe the modern and forward-looking Labour party of the 90s, speaheaded by Blair and Brown.
What do you think were the typical characteristics of this New Labour era and which year(s) do you think it reached its peak?
It was a reaction against traditional labour policies such as Nationalisation etc.
I think that while there might have needed to be a bit of reorientation away from those policies at the time, "new labour" got too in bed with the market side of things.
We had the proposals to sell off Royal Mail, the sell off of our Nuclear industry and the sell off of directory enquiries.
Admittedly, it's not the most calamitous privatisation ever undertaken. But it was symptomatic of a malaise that has affected politics in this country for the last forty years !
Admittedly, it's not the most calamitous privatisation ever undertaken. But it was symptomatic of a malaise that has affected politics in this country for the last forty years !
Actually I just did some cursory research, and am (un)surprised to see that the most memorable 118 numbers were extorting callers, many of whom are likely technophobic and therefore likely older, to the tune of £11.50 per call, forcing Ofcom to implement price caps in 2019. So much for the competition driving down prices… so you may have a point.
That said, depending on the terms of the sale (was it a one-off payment per number sold?), it could have been a stroke of genius. It was disposed at the height of its popularity, with smartphones making it almost completely redundant just a couple of years later.
Actually I just did some cursory research, and am (un)surprised to see that the most memorable 118 numbers were extorting callers, many of whom are likely technophobic and therefore likely older, to the tune of £11.50 per call, forcing Ofcom to implement price caps in 2019. So much for the competition driving down prices… so you may have a point.
That said, depending on the terms of the sale (was it a one-off payment per number sold?), it could have been a stroke of genius. It was disposed at the height of its popularity, with smartphones making it almost completely redundant just a couple of years later.
Whatever you think of New Labour - the huge expansion of the PFI initiative being disastrous (though I think it was started under the Conservatives in 1992) - they did introduce the minimum wage, despite predictions of mass movement of jobs abroad.
There has, of course, been mass movement of jobs abroad, particularly in manufacturing, through the period (and since), but it would be unfair to say that is the fault of the minimum wage, it is just an ongoing desire for consumers to pay the lowest possible prices.
I think some of the characteristics of the New Labour era were cultural changes in the 90s and 00s which took place outside of parliamentary politics, but meant Labour could associate themselves with a positive progressive mood. These could include:
Technology - computers and the internet becoming widely used, the start of digital public services
Media diversification - BBC Three and Four, the Independent, digital radio, MP3 music, blogs
More acceptance of racial and sexual minorities
More women working (including as Labour MPs)
The start of budget flights, the Channel Tunnel and more travel abroad
A wider range of food products
Whatever you think of New Labour - the huge expansion of the PFI initiative being disastrous (though I think it was started under the Conservatives in 1992)
Yes, one of the first and most notable examples was the Skye Bridge, which was started by the Conservatives and then continued under New Labour. In terms of PFI, it was really an absolute disgrace.
To give some background to the unaware, the Skye crossing from Kyle of Lochalsh to Kyleakin was making around 1m a year in profits for state-owned CalMac. The bridge itself and related infrastructure cost around 25m, but with travel severely limited in summer months due to the relatively low capacity of the ferries (roughly 36 cars in one direction every 15 minutes), the bridge should have paid for itself very easily.
Islanders were used to travelling for free, but they wouldn't have objected to paying the same tolls as other bridges in Scotland, so they could easily have charged 80p in the direction of Skye while placing the toll booth next to the traffic lights in Kyle of Lochalsh. This would let people access the supermarket in Kyle without paying, and they could maintain the tolls for non-islanders/locals at the ferry fare, which was around 5 pounds at the time.
But this was purely ideological on the part of the Tories, as they were deeply unpopular at the time in Scotland. Labour (and then the Scottish Executive under Labour) then used the same model to build schools and hospitals, but Scotland will be paying a substantial amount for these facilities for many years to come.
So yes, New Labour for me should be associated with PFI. We modernised our aging infrastructure, but at the cost of the next generation. I actually wonder how much of the current economic mess is because of PFI payments?
Actually I just did some cursory research, and am (un)surprised to see that the most memorable 118 numbers were extorting callers, many of whom are likely technophobic and therefore likely older, to the tune of £11.50 per call, forcing Ofcom to implement price caps in 2019. So much for the competition driving down prices… so you may have a point.
Yes, that whole 118 nonsense. I doubt that was Labour's decision though.
Remember 118 118, aka The Two Twits Telephone Co. plc, and those two idiots they used to use in their advertising campaigns while they were charging extortionate rates?
"We are better than the old directory enquiries because our advertising features two silly men. Who cares if we are more expensive? Doesn't matter. 192 - no silly men. 118 118 - silly men. We're clearly better than boring old 192!".
Did 118 666 exist? That number would sum up what I thought of the whole thing.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Indeed. Whatever you think of Blair and New Labour, they did introduce some genuinely left-leaning things (minimum wage and limit on working hours) as well as more generally liberal things such as opening up the countryside to walkers with right-to-roam. You would never, I suspect, have got a Conservative government unilaterally introducing such things, even if they choose to maintain them later.
While they undoubtedly have their faults (the Iraq war was an almighty c***-up by Blair, sadly), the UK seemed to be a more progressive and forward-thinking nation in the mid/late 90s and early/mid 00s (which admittedly does include some of the Major period) than since. Since the credit crunch there just seems to have been a steady deterioration, both in government and general outlook, particularly since about 2016 and even more since Boris got in.
Could it be argued that the credit crunch screwed Western society in general and no western country has ever been the same since? That the (post-recession) 90s and much of the 00s will be long seen as a golden era (in the same way the 60s was for those about then), not to return for a while?
Yes, that whole 118 nonsense. I doubt that was Labour's decision though.
Remember 118 118, aka The Two Twits Telephone Co. plc, and those two idiots they used to use in their advertising campaigns while they were charging extortionate rates?
"We are better than the old directory enquiries because our advertising features two silly men. Who cares if we are more expensive? Doesn't matter. 192 - no silly men. 118 118 - silly men. We're clearly better than boring old 192!".
Did 118 666 exist? That number would sum up what I thought of the whole thing.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Indeed. Whatever you think of Blair and New Labour, they did introduce some genuinely left-leaning things (minimum wage and limit on working hours) as well as more generally liberal things such as opening up the countryside to walkers with right-to-roam. You would never, I suspect, have got a Conservative government unilaterally introducing such things, even if they choose to maintain them later.
While they undoubtedly have their faults (the Iraq war was an almighty c***-up by Blair, sadly), the UK seemed to be a more progressive and forward-thinking nation in the mid/late 90s and early/mid 00s (which admittedly does include some of the Major period) than since. Since the credit crunch there just seems to have been a steady deterioration, both in government and general outlook, particularly since about 2016 and even more since Boris got in.
Could it be argued that the credit crunch screwed Western society in general and no western country has ever been the same since? That the (post-recession) 90s and much of the 00s will be long seen as a golden era (in the same way the 60s was for those about then), not to return for a while?
I quite liked the New Labour era overall for the points you have made. However, I think this forward-looking and progressive Britain was still there for most of the 2010s, just perhaps not as strong as the first half of Blair's tenure. Cameron and Osbourne brought in the austerity measures, but you could argue they were necessary to help rebuild the economy. Even after Brexit, I would say under Theresa May there were still positive points; like trying for a soft Brexit and keeping relations with the EU as strong as possible. It was during the Boris era that I things really started going backwards here - even more so this year.
Admittedly, it's not the most calamitous privatisation ever undertaken. But it was symptomatic of a malaise that has affected politics in this country for the last forty years !
I’m slightly confused by your assertion that directory enquiries was privatised under New Labour. Surely it was privatised along with the rest of BT in 1984?
Could it be argued that the credit crunch screwed Western society in general and no western country has ever been the same since? That the (post-recession) 90s and much of the 00s will be long seen as a golden era (in the same way the 60s was for those about then), not to return for a while?
I’m slightly confused by your assertion that directory enquiries was privatised under New Labour. Surely it was privatised along with the rest of BT in 1984?
I’m slightly confused by your assertion that directory enquiries was privatised under New Labour. Surely it was privatised along with the rest of BT in 1984?
Until the introduction of the 118 system, people had no choice about which directory service they could choose; 192 would simply route the call to each provider's directory enquiry service. Some telecoms companies had their own facilities but much of the time when you dialled 192, you'd end up getting through to a BT call centre anyway, as they provided wholesale "white label" services for other companies, including at least one of the cable telcos (I can't remember if it was NTL or Telewest). The first thing I had to do before answering any calls was to record a large number of salutations which would be automatically read out to each customer. I cannot recall the exact number but there were over eighty and every time there was an addition to the list, I had to record the whole bloody lot again!
118 seemed pointless to me because of the above, and the fact that all the information was in the same database. Oh, and I was made redundant as a result
Getting the thread back on topic, this is not something that was New Labour's fault; it just happened on their watch. I think it was the EU that was ultimately responsible for the death of 192!
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
